2D fighters took over the 3D ones in their graphics realm.

Avatar image for Valkeerie
#1 Posted by Valkeerie (309 posts) -

Will the latter side step the issue, fail to jump over it, or take the former head on?

I hope that there is a fighter in the future that doesn't lock the characters to each other, that is, to readjust the camera so that they're always on the side. I don't want free movement to run aimlessly in circles like party brawlers though. I want the character to remain in fighting stances to swap between them and to make the move's input relative, not just to the stance, but to how it relates to the camera.

Let me give you an example: in case you used double forward and punch to make a heavy strike by tapping right (because you're the character on the left), you have to consider the character's facing direction relative to the camera, so that the double input matches and delivers the same strike. Should the character be facing forward by standing on the back of the screen, then tapping up on the d-pad twice would be the way to go.

Avatar image for vfighter
#2 Posted by VFighter (5134 posts) -

Wtf are you talking about?

Avatar image for npiet1
#3 Posted by npiet1 (2481 posts) -

@vfighter said:

Wtf are you talking about?

He's saying he prefers 2d fighters (or really 3d fighters were you cant move up or down Mortal kombat is an example) compared to 3d fighters (tekken). Other than that I've got no idea.

Avatar image for l3igl3oss
#4 Posted by l3igl3oss (59 posts) -

He's basically saying that in 3D Fighters:

  • He doesn't want the characters locked on to each other so that they can side step or circle the opponent.
  • He doesn't want the camera to show the characters on their side moving left and right.
  • He doesn't want free movement like Power Stone or Bushido Blade.

These I can agree with to take advantage of their environment, but not with what he said afterwards:

  • The moves' input should take the characters' facing direction with regards to the camera, so that their forward is a diagonal on the d-pad in case they are facing northwest, for example.

It's very complicated to follow a few moves up with others when the camera pans around and you have to consider the character changing his facing direction. Do it like Shenmue I & II instead, where the camera angles give forward a broader range, and its moves are variants of left and right inputs.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
#5 Posted by RSM-HQ (8542 posts) -

@npiet1 said:

He's saying he prefers 2d fighters (or really 3d fighters were you cant move up or down Mortal kombat is an example) compared to 3d fighters (tekken). Other than that I've got no idea.

With how nerfed and delayed side stepping is in Tekken 7 I'm surprised one can even call it a '3D Fighter' lol. Tekken was watered down to cater towards 2D Fighter fans. Otherwise those Supers (Rage Arts) and Akuma spamming would be pretty pointless. Tekken died with Tag 2, it's now just a cash-cow in the same way as Dead or Alive.

Soul Calibur VI is a pretty good 3D Fighting game though, probably mechanically the best Soul Calibur we've had. Even though the roster really needs some variety. Aeon, Yun-seong. . would even settle for Dampierre.

Avatar image for npiet1
#6 Posted by npiet1 (2481 posts) -

@RSM-HQ said:
@npiet1 said:

He's saying he prefers 2d fighters (or really 3d fighters were you cant move up or down Mortal kombat is an example) compared to 3d fighters (tekken). Other than that I've got no idea.

With how nerfed and delayed side stepping is in Tekken 7 I'm surprised one can even call it a '3D Fighter' lol. Tekken was watered down to cater towards 2D Fighter fans. Otherwise those Supers (Rage Arts) and Akuma spamming would be pretty pointless. Tekken died with Tag 2, it's now just a cash-cow in the same way as Dead or Alive.

Soul Calibur VI is a pretty good 3D Fighting game though, probably mechanically the best Soul Calibur we've had. Even though the roster really needs some variety. Aeon, Yun-seong. . would even settle for Dampierre.

I haven't really played a fighter since tekken tag (the one with the bowling). It was the only example I knew.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#7 Edited by uninspiredcup (34401 posts) -

I mean, both are thriving really.

Everyone wins.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
#8 Posted by RSM-HQ (8542 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

I mean, both are thriving really.

Everyone wins.

Not really for 3D Fighters. But at least Soul Calibur has redeemed itself.

Avatar image for speeny
#9 Posted by Speeny (1886 posts) -

I prefer 3D myself. Probably because I never grew up with 2D fighters all that much.

Avatar image for Valkeerie
#10 Posted by Valkeerie (309 posts) -

The best that 3D Fighters can do is to unlock the characters from each other. 2D Fighters made sense with how their characters faced each other on a plane, and beat em ups like Guardian Heroes extended their arenas, so that we could move anywhere and face whomever we wanted. That's what 3D Brawlers do, but without a fighting system that isn't button mashing, because there's no 3D Fighter whose mechanics allow the arenas to be extended, and any opponent to be taken on. This is what I want for the genre in 3D: extensibility and the extra dimension to be enjoyed.

Avatar image for l3igl3oss
#11 Posted by l3igl3oss (59 posts) -

I think that you need to play a Dreamcast game called Ultimate Fighting Championship. It has 8-way movement like Soul Calibur and separate limb control like Tekken, and the fighters move about in their arena almost freely, but they're still forced to face each other. Perhaps those will be more up your league.